click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
and comprehensive package to shrink the deficit by $1.8 trillion over 10 years and are meant the fiscal uncertainty that hampers economic growth and job creation. this remark does not represent the starting point for negotiation. represent tagamet savings and additional roadrunners for those of the. the two cannot be separated and were not separated last december when we were close to a bipartisan agreement. this budget provides achievable solutions to fiscal problems, the crucial a solution desired, we have to do more than focus on deficit and debt. the significance of balancing the budget is clear as ranking member then holland noted, i hope negotiate the groundbreaking agreement with congress to do just that as budget director oversaw three budget surpluses and worked with many on the left in right on a plan to pay off our debt. that does not mean we should make deficit reduction are one and only priority. in addition to ensuring sound fiscal fitting we will have everyone of these initiatives paid for in our deficit reduction package can i mean day donati done to the deficit. as the president ex
to have a flat tariff of 10% or 20% or 30% whatever it takes to get to a zero trade deficit that doesn't introduce a lot of corruption or a lot of dangers bad policymaking because it's a very simple policy. it's just determined by an arithmetical formula and there's no opportunity for anybody to play games. one of the good things about it if you have a flat tariff, is if you had a 30% tariff on imported goods that's not enough to relocate the production of t-shirts that united states because cost is too great. it's great to relocate things like silicon wafer fabrication so would tend to relocate back to the u.s. high value capital-intensive skill intensive industries which is of course what we want to do. those are the industries that are high-quality -- high-quality into she wants to have and those are the industries that don't want to lose. i point that out just to point out that if you do get serious about protectionism, protectionism has a logic to it which if you understand what that logic is, i think it would be possible for the u.s. to make a winner out of this. whether we shoul
deficit at or close to $1 trillion for five straight years. millions of americans are out of work or living in poverty. the highest rates we have seen in a generation. the administration's response seems to be more of the same. more spending higher taxes and record debt. what we can't keep spending money we don't have. we need a new approach. we need an approach that encourages economic growth. the longer we delay fundamental reform. the longer we delay a real recovery. our national debt is weighing down our country like an anchor. it's weighing down our economy. it's making it harder for us to get ahead. the administration claims that if we approve the budget we'll have reduced deficit by 4.3 trillion. this is not true. i want to break it down and they'll show me how. the administration said we reduced deficit by police $2.6. the president is responsible for all the policy enacted before when he was in office for the first two years. if you add back the money for the stimlis, the payroll tax holiday, the 24% increase in domestic spend. total deficit reduction when you net it out
aancedproach to deficit reduction and strengthen the middle class. as i said, last week our focus in the next little while will be on guns and budget, talked about budget. i will be joined by my colleague, congressman mike thompson of california. congressman thompson is a vietnam vet, a wounded vietnam vet. he is a gun owner, hunter. is the head of our task force on gun violence prevention, and he is a co-author of the bipartisan bill in the house with peter king. to put forth a manchin-toomey compromise that failed, so sadly, in the senate last night. we are so disappointed. our sorrow was expressed so appropriately by president obama last night that i invited mike to join us here to tell you where we go from here and to answer the question that people are saying what can we do to change this. mike, would you speak -- thank you for your leadership. >> thank you, leader pelosi. it's a pleasure and honor to join you, to talk about and to answer any questions that you guys may have on gun violence prevention. -manchin amendment that failefailed last night, as i thk everybody knows. it was every
, the last child in the woods about children's nature deficit disorder, as he calls it. this has happened slowly. it started with writers like jack london and william long that theodore roosevelt called major fakers. that put -- we go through how we began increasingly to get our views of nature digitally and on screens rather than hands-on a stewardship kind of things. and so we took ourselves out of the storage of business. we took our cells out of the prediction business. huge swaths of the white tailed year's historic range, which is that eastern one-third of the united states, it's off-limits to human predation, and there is all sorts of evidence not to suggest that the biggest predator of white tail deer since the end of the last ice age is not wolves and cougars but human beings. so -- and i had messages is wildlife do a study. two rules which we all think of much. you cannot discharge a firearm within 150 feet of a hard surface road in massachusetts or thin 500 feet of an occupied dwelling. massachusetts has a lot of rose and a lot of people. it is the fourth most dense -- per four
-inflicted wounds without adding one penny to the deficit. we've provided money, the money is there, we haven't spent it, we don't need to. we can use the savings from wrapping up two wars to avoid the full brunt of the sequester's arbitrary cuts. the congressional budget office said that would score; that money is available, it is money we could use. funding for the operation in ir a afgan has in alled overseas contin yeype account. since the worst of the seq cuts are creating an emergency situation, we should consider using thighs funds to offset their impact. these really are emergencies and we should do it. i am not proposing we use them to offset the entire sequester but congress has the power to avert the most painful sequester cuts using these mexico. 28 republicans in the senate and 174 republicans in the house would impose these sequester haphazard cuts. if those same republicans work with democrats, we could act to protect families and businesses and ensure our national defense and save millions of americans hours waiting at the airport. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presi
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6